| Message ID | 20200928083429.17390-12-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | firmware/soc: ti_sci, ringacc/inta: Preparation for AM64 DMA support | expand |
On 28/09/2020 11:34, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > It's JTAG PARTNO is 0xBB38. > > Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> > --- > drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c > index bbbc2d2b7091..a14ec68846dd 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ static const struct k3_soc_id { > { 0xBB5A, "AM65X" }, > { 0xBB64, "J721E" }, > { 0xBB6D, "J7200" }, > + { 0xBB38, "AM64" } Shouldn't it be AM64X > }; > > static int >
Hi Grygorii, On 30/09/2020 16.56, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > > > On 28/09/2020 11:34, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: >> It's JTAG PARTNO is 0xBB38. >> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> >> --- >> drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c >> index bbbc2d2b7091..a14ec68846dd 100644 >> --- a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c >> +++ b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c >> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ static const struct k3_soc_id { >> { 0xBB5A, "AM65X" }, >> { 0xBB64, "J721E" }, >> { 0xBB6D, "J7200" }, >> + { 0xBB38, "AM64" } > > Shouldn't it be AM64X Good point, I'll fix this up and then the DMA series. While here, what do you think: should we keep the DMA compatibles as I have them in v1 (am64-dmss-bcdma and am64-dmss-pktdma): https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200930091412.8020-10-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200930091412.8020-11-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com/ or change them to am64x-dmss-* ? I'll ask Rob on the binding doc patches as well. > >> }; >> static int >> > - Péter Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki. Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki
On 10/1/20 12:12 PM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > Hi Grygorii, > > On 30/09/2020 16.56, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >> >> >> On 28/09/2020 11:34, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: >>> It's JTAG PARTNO is 0xBB38. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c >>> index bbbc2d2b7091..a14ec68846dd 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c >>> +++ b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c >>> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ static const struct k3_soc_id { >>> { 0xBB5A, "AM65X" }, >>> { 0xBB64, "J721E" }, >>> { 0xBB6D, "J7200" }, >>> + { 0xBB38, "AM64" } >> >> Shouldn't it be AM64X > > Good point, I'll fix this up and then the DMA series. > > While here, what do you think: should we keep the DMA compatibles as I > have them in v1 (am64-dmss-bcdma and am64-dmss-pktdma): > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200930091412.8020-10-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com/ > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200930091412.8020-11-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com/ > > or change them to am64x-dmss-* ? > > I'll ask Rob on the binding doc patches as well. As long as differences within the family are discoverable by some other means, wild chars may be okay. See one of Rob's earlier responses: https://linuxlists.cc/l/1/linux-kernel/t/3311057/(patch_1_2)_dt-bindings:_ptp:_add_binding_doc_for_idt_clockmatrix_based_ptp_clock Regards Vignesh
diff --git a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c index bbbc2d2b7091..a14ec68846dd 100644 --- a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c +++ b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ static const struct k3_soc_id { { 0xBB5A, "AM65X" }, { 0xBB64, "J721E" }, { 0xBB6D, "J7200" }, + { 0xBB38, "AM64" } }; static int
It's JTAG PARTNO is 0xBB38. Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> --- drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)